Financial Sustainability Scorecard for Protected Areas

7/27/2019 Financial Sustainability Scorecard for Protected Areas

1/28

Energy & Environment Group

Bureau or Development Policy

United Nations Development Programme

304 East 45th Street

New York, New York 10017http://www.undp.org/


2/28

Financial Sustainability Scorecard

for National Systems of Protected Areas

2nd Editi on, 2010


3/28

2nd Edition, January 2010

UNDP Copyright 2007.

United Nations Development Programme,

304 East 45th Street, New York, New York 10017

Acknowledgments:

Many thanks to the ollowing who contributed to the development o this document: Jaime Fernandez Baca, Maria Fernanda Acosta, Steve Cobb, Christopher Cosslett,

Scott Edwards, Jamie Ervin, Marlon Flores, Julie Gale, Jose Galindo, Maria Jose Gonzalez, John Hough, Helen Negret, Midori Paxton, Patricia Perez, Juan Jose Rodriguez,

Nik Sekhran, Jonathan Smith, Lee Thomas, Maria Elena Zuniga, Michelle Libby

Graphic Design: Sandra Rojas

Cover photo: Amazonia urbanhearts.otolia.com

Weblink: www.undp.org/gef/kmanagement/newpublication.html


4/28

Financial Sustainability Scorecard:or National Systems o Protected Areas

Andrew BovArnick

2nd edition, 2010

NOTE: thisdocumentreflectstheviewsoftheAuthorAndnotnecessArilythoseof undP. itisworkin

ProgressAndAllcommentsAndsuggestionsshouldBesenttotheAuthorAtAndrew.BovArnick@undP.org

Andrew Bovarnick is the Lead Natural Resource Economist, UNDP


5/28

2 Contents

INTRODUCTION 3FINANCIAL SCORECARD PART I OVERALL FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE PROTECTED AREAS SYSTEM 9

FINANCIAL SCORECARD PART II ASSESSING ELEMENTS OF THE FINANCING SYSTEM 15

FINANCIAL SCORECARD PART III SCORING AND MEASURING PROGRESS 23

Electronic downloadable versions:

www.undp.org/ge/kmanagement/newpublication.html


6/28

3

Protected area nancing is critical or sound PA management. However,

globally, protected area nancing needs to be improved at both site and

system level. Hence developing long-term nancing systems is a key

element or protected areas sustainability.

Protected area nancial sustainability reers to the ability o a country to

meet all costs associated with the management o a protected area system.

The system level is dened here simply as the aggregation o PA sites and

central level operations. This implies a unding supply issue o generating

more revenue across the system, but just as importantly, a demand side

challenge o managing PA nancing needs (at sites and at the central level).

PA nancial sustainability needs to be addressed rom both sides o the

nancial equation.

It is this systematic process o dening costs and identiying ways to meet

those costs that constitutes nancial planning. Good nancial planning

enables PA managers to make strategic nancial decisions such as re-

allocating spending to match management priorities, and identiying

appropriate cost reductions and potential cash ow problems.

In addition to cost and revenue concerns, a third area that requires special

consideration in order to achieve PA nancial sustainability is institutional

arrangements. Responsibility or PA management and nancing are

oten shared across various institutions and roles need to be claried and

harmonized or eective nancial planning and budgeting. Furthermore,

within these managing institutions efcient and transparent mechanisms

or collecting and managing PA-related ees are oten not in place.

INTRODUCTION

ContextThereore, UNDP has developed this scorecard to assist project teams and

governments track their progress to make PA systems more nancially

sustainable. The scorecard has been designed at the PA system level and

not site level because:

There are activities required at a national level and not just at site

level such as policy reorm, und management and setting PA ees,

which can aect all PAs;

There are activities that require a coordinated eort and support

rom several government institutions, particularly the Ministry

o Finance, which are best achieved through a centralized

management and nancing system;

Sites will oten require similar activities so it is cost-eective to

provide these centrally, such as training or monitoring;

Fundraising can be more eective i coordinated centrally;

System level planning allows cross-subsidization between sites;

and

Harmonized ee systems can reduce competition issues between

sites.

PA nancing must be viewed at two levels. One is the basic status o a PA

systems nances how much is being spent and how much is needed to

be spent or eective management. This will look at annual expenditures,

operational costs, investment needs, revenue generation etc. From this

it is possible to assess nancing gaps and nancial targets or increasing

budgets and expenditures and/or reducing management costs in order to

balance accounts.


7/28

4 However, there are limitations to what a snapshot o a PA systems nancialaccounts shows about the underlying structure, health and uture directiono its nance. One year there could be a high level o expenditure due to

donor support, a capital injection rom a debt-or-nature swap, or a jump

in tourism. However, one years nancial status does not necessarily ensure

the uture nancial health o a PA system. To ully assess i a PA system is

moving towards nancial sustainability it is also important to investigate

and analyze the structural oundations o what enables and promotes

long-term nancial improvements or PAs. A PA systems nancing is based

on many elements, which are becoming increasingly known, and are quite

common across countries.

Assessing a PA systems nancial sustainability is widely recognized as a

key component o eective PA management. The Programme o Work o

the Convention on Biological Diversity acknowledges the importance o

nancial sustainability by including specic recommended actions or

countries under Goal 3.4, which ocuses on ensuring nancial sustainability

o protected areas. Specic activities under this goal include: a) conducting

a national-level study o the eectiveness o existing nancial resources;

b) identiying diversied unding mechanisms and options; c) establishing

a national-level sustainable nance plan; and d) developing and

implementing supportive enabling policies. This nancial scorecard covers

many o the aspects in Goal 3.4 o the CBD Programme o Work, and can

provide the basis or many o the recommended actions.

Purpose

The purpose o this scorecard is to assist governments, donors and NGOs

to investigate and record signicant aspects o a PA nancing system

its accounts and its underlying structural oundations to show both

its current health and status and to indicate i the system is holistically

moving over the long-term towards an improved nancial situation. The

scorecard is designed or national systems o PAs but could be used by

sub-national eg state, regional or municipal or networks o Marine Protected

Areas (MPAs).

There is a section to record overall nancial status and changes to the

inows and outows o capital o the PA system. However, the scorecard

is designed to check the progress o the entire PA nancing system and its

oundations which will lead to the uture nancial viability o a PA system.

Thereore the scorecard is structured to look at elements o a nancing

system, described below.

These elements in themselves provide guidance on what a ramework or

a PA nancing system should comprise. Assessing each element can help

a country identiy which areas o its governance structure needs to be

improved to enhance its PA nancing system.

The questions regarding nancial data also provide an opportunity or a

country to assess its capacity to generate and collect cost and revenue data

undamental or PA nancial planning. Where data is unavailable, provision

o such data should be a priority or the country.

Whilst the scorecard recognizes the importance o cost-eective

management in PA nancing it does not provide specic guidance on the

use o unds.

Results o the nancial scorecard can also contribute to the Convention

on Biological Diversitys activity 3.4.5 within Goal 3.4: Providing regular

inormation on protected area nancing to relevant institutions and

mechanisms, including through uture national reports under the

Convention on Biological Diversity, and to the World Database on

Protected Areas.


8/28

5StructureThe scorecard has three sections:

Part I Overall nancial status o the protected areas system.

This includes basic protected area inormation and a

nancial analysis o the national protected area system.

Part II Assessing elements o the nancing system.

Part III Scoring.

Part I requires nancial data to determine the costs, revenues and

nancing gaps o the PA system both in the current year and as orecast

or the uture. It provides a quantitative analysis o the PA system and

shows the nancial data needed by PA planners needed to determine

nancial targets and hence the quantity o additional unds required to

nance eective management o their PA system. As dierent countries

have dierent accounting systems certain data requirements may vary in

their relevance or each country. However, where nancial data is absent,

the rst activity the PA authority should be to generate and collect the

data.

Part II o the scorecard is compartmentalized into three undamental

components or a ully unctioning nancial system at the site and system

level (i) legal, regulatory and institutional rameworks, (ii) business

planning and tools or cost-eective management (eg accounting practices)

and (iii) tools or revenue generation.

COMPONENT 1: LEGAL, REGULATORY AND INSTITUTIONALFRAMEWORKS THAT ENABLE SUSTAINABLE PA FINANCING

Legal, policy, regulatory and institutional rameworks aecting PA nancing

systems need to be clearly dened and supportive o eective nancial

planning, revenue generation, revenue retention and management.

Institutional responsibilities must be clearly delineated and agreed, and an

enabling policy and legal environment in place. Institutional governance

structures must enable and require the use o eective, transparent

mechanisms or allocation, management and accounting o revenues and

expenditures.

COMPONENT 2: BUSINESS PLANNING AND TOOLS FORCOST-EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT

Financial planning, accounting and business planning are important

tools or cost-eective management when undertaken on a regular

and systematic basis. Eective nancial planning requires accurate

knowledge not only o revenues, but also o expenditure levels, patterns

and investment requirements. Options or balancing the costs/revenues

equation should include equal consideration o revenue increases and

cost control. Good nancial planning enables PA managers to make

strategic nancial decisions such as allocating spending to match

management priorities, and identiying appropriate cost reductions and

potential cash ow problems. Improved planning can also help raise

more unds as donors and governments eel more assured that their

unds will be more eectively invested in the protected area system.

COMPONENT 3: TOOLS FOR REVENUE GENERATION ANDMOBILIZATION

PA systems must be able to attract and take advantage o all existing

and potential revenue mechanisms within the context o their overall

management priorities. Diversication o revenue sources is a powerul

strategy to reduce vulnerability to external shocks and dependency on

limited government budgets. Sources o revenue or protected area

systems can include traditional unding sources tourism entrance ees


9/28

6 along with innovative ones such as debt swaps, tourism concessionarrangements, payments or water and carbon services and in some cases,careully controlled levels o resource extraction.

Part III summarizes the total scores and percentages scored by the country

in any given year when the exercise is completed. It shows the total possible

score and the total actual score or the PA system and presents the results

as a percentage. Over time changes to the scores can show progress in

strengthening the PA nancingy system.

Scoring

The Scorecard should be completed every year to show the yearly situation

in the protected area system and the changes over time. The rst year the

Scorecard is completed becomes the baseline year and this stays xed.

Then i the Scorecard is completed every subsequent year the results can

be compared to the baseline data and data rom previous years to show

the annual progress o the national PA nancing system.

Each year the scores within Part II should be totaled or each Component

and these sub-totals added together to reach an overall score or the

national PA system.

In each country certain elements may be more important and difcult to

achieve than others. In this case country teams have the exibility to modiy

the current weighting system and change the number o points allocated

to a certain element so the scoring better suits their national conditions.

Any modications to scoring should be transparent and ootnoted.

Additionally i a specic element or sub-element is not appropriate or a

country then it and its associated maximum scores can be taken out o

the total possible scoring. In this way the total score can be adjusted to t

the country conditions. Because this means the total possible score may

vary countries should present annual scores as a percentage (actual score

compared to total possible score).

The percentage o achievement o each Component should be presented.

This allows a comparison o progress between each Component and can aid

countries to identiy where their weaknesses and strengths are within their

nancing systems. Where lower scores are identied the corresponding

areas should be a ocus or uture intervention and capacity building. The

percentages will also permit comparisons across countries


10/28

7Guidance or Preparation o Scorecard

It is recommended that the Scorecard is prepared through a workshop orum bringing together

all stakeholders. Scorecard workshops generally are run over one to two days dependingon data available and level o interest. Completing the nancial data is then done through

reviewing documents. Those involved with preparing the Scorecard (workshop organizers and

participants) should take the ollowing ideas into account when preparing the Scorecards:

The Scorecard is to1. shed light into what was previously oten a black box. It allows

practitioners to dissect components through discussion, and is not an exact science.

It is or every country in the world so will not necessarily t exactly any specic country.2.

This should not lead to concern. The Scorecard should be considered as a oundation and

template to be tailored to t country needs. This may mean changing terminology to t

local understanding or eliminating or adding elements. Adjust as necessary.

The scorecard has been designed to be as simple as possible given the complexities PA3.

nancing systems ace. There will be uncertainties and questions about the nature o

some o the elements. I in doubt use the best judgment o the group preparing the

Scorecard.

The4. processo preparation should be participatory, bringing in experts rom dierent

departments, ministries, NGOs and protected areas to get an all round picture. The mix o

stakeholders and expertise will be valuable to ensure that comprehensive and accurate

data is inputted into completing the Scorecard.

The scorecard is meant to5. stimulate discussion and thinking on subjects that have

previously oten been ignored. Questions and debate during preparation are good as

it means people are thinking. The richness o the discussions should be captured in the

comments columns or uture reerence. The more explanation o data in the comments

column the more valuable the Scorecard will be as a planning and monitoring tool.

Try to make sure participants invited to the Scorecard workshop are6. preparedgoing into

the workshop. They should have seen the Scorecard template and come with data andideas to the workshop.

The most important thing is to understand and7. appreciate the intentbehind each element,not the specicities and doubts raised. The group should ocus on what is the important

concept being raised and how the PA system deals with it.

The Scorecard8. summarizes all major issues that are oten not thought about or at least

not thought about in one package. By going through all o them together there is an

opportunity to look at the entire system and identiy elements to be improved. The

Scorecard is thus a platorm or stimulating discussion and urther investigation into issues

important to sustainable nancing.

Part I on data will likely be the most challenging. There are tough questions but every9.

country must have this data to run its PA eectively. The point is to highlight what data

is missing and have countries start thinking about how to generate and collect data.

Scorecard preparers should not be too concerned i data is absent. They should state its

absence and plan how to generate it during the next year.

The discussions more than anything else allows those involved with PA nancing to10.

explain and bring important issues to light to those not always involved but infuential

in PA nancing.

Financial planning or PAs is a process and the Scorecard is to help start or strengthen11.

the process o thinking about nancial elements, data collection and how a country can

improve it. This will take time and ollow up.


11/28

8

..........................................................

........................ / .......................Month Year

.........................................................

Country:

Date o Completion:

Year o data used:


12/28

9

National Systems o Protected Areas can include the entire set o PAs in a

country but oten consist o several sets o protected areas. These sets can

be dened as either sub-systems or networks o protected areas, depending

on their legal status.

A Sub-system is a set o protected areas whose operations are governed

by a legal ramework. A network is a set o protected areas that have

commonalities and coordination but no dedicated legal ramework.

Protected area practitioners oten wish to assess and improve understanding

o dierent parts o the national protected area system and may not have

data or all parts. Hence it is recommended to prepare the Scorecard or

each sub-system and or any network as needed. It is thereore useul to

detail all the PA sub-systems and networks in the country. These can be

presented in the Table in Part I.1.

Sub-systems will include:

Federal

State or provincial

Networks o PAs will vary by country depending on national denitions

but will likely include the ollowing:

municipal protected areas

co-managed protected areas

private reserves

community and indigenous reserves

Additionally, any set o PAs can be assessed or their nancial sustainability

as needed by a country or practitioners. These could be geographic eg a

sub-region o a country, or ecological eg marine protected areas.

FINANCIAL SCORECARD PART I OVERALL FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE PROTECTED AREAS SYSTEM

GuatemalaU

NDPPhotolibrary

Note: In some countries some networks may have a legal ramework and hence should be classied as a sub-system


13/28

10 Part I.1 Basic Inormation on Countrys National Protected Area System, Sub-systems and Networks

Detail in the Table every sub-system and network within the national system o protected areas in the country.

Protected Areas System,

sub-systems and networks

Number

of sites

Terrestrial

hectares

covered

Marine hectares

covered1Total hectares

covered

Institution responsible

for PA management

Comments

National System of PAs

Sub-system

PA sub-system 1 insert name

PA sub-system 2 insert name

Additional sub-system

Network

Speciy i the network is

within a sub-system

PA network 1 insert name

PA network 2 insert name

Additional networks

Total

1 MPAs should be detailed separately to terrestrial PAs as they tend to be much larger in size and have different cost structures

* For each sub-system and/or Network detailed in Part I.1, prepare Part I.2


14/28

11Part I.2 Financial Analysis o the National Protected Area SystemComplete this separately or each PA sub-system and or any network presented in Table I.1, as needed

Financial Analysis o the Sub-System or Network[Insert name o Sub-System or Network]

Baseline

year(US$)3

Year X4

(US$)5

Comments

Add the source o data and state condence in data (low,medium, high)

Available Finances6

1. Total annual central government budget allocated to PA management (excluding donorunds and revenues generated or the PA system)

- operational budget (salaries, maintenance, uel etc)

- inrastructure investment budget (roads, visitor centres etc)

2. Extra budgetary unding or PA management- Total o 2.a +2.b -

Speciy sources o unds

a. Funds channelled through government total- PA dedicated taxes eg a conservation departure tax or water ees re-invested

in PAs

- Trust Funds Only include available unds or the year and not

amounts contributed or capitalization

- Donor unds

- Loans

- Debt or nature swaps

- Others

b. Funds channelled through third party/independent institutional arrangements total

- Trust Funds

- Donor unds

- Loans

- Others

2 The baseline year refers to the year the Scorecard was completed for the first time and remains fixed. Insert year eg 2007.3 Insert in footnote the local currency and exchange rate to US$ and date of rate (eg US$1=1000 colones, August 2007).4 X refers to the year the S corecard is completed and should be inserted (eg 2008). For the first time the Scorecard is completed X w ill be the same as the baseline year. For subsequent years insert an additional column to present the data for each year

the Scorecard is completed.5 Insert in footnote the local currency and exchange rate to US$ and date of rate.6 This section unravels sources of funds available to PAs, categorized by (i) government core bu dget (line item 1), (ii) additional government funds (line item 2), and (iii) PA generated revenues (line item 3).


15/28

123. Total annual site based revenue generation across all PAs broken down by sou rce7

- TotalIndicate total economic value o PAs (i studies available)8

a. Tourism entrance ees Speciy the number o visitors to the protected areas inyear X

- international:- national:

Speciy ee levels:

Estimate % o overall ees generated by most popular

PAs within the system (as oten a igh % o ees may be

generated by only one or two PA sites):

Estimate total revenues possible i ee level raised:

b. Other tourism and recreational related ees (camping, shing permits etc) Speciy purpose and level o ees:

c. Income rom concessions Speciy type o concession

d. Payments or ecosystem services (PES) Provide examples:

- water

- carbon

- biodiversity

- other

e. Other non-tourism related ees and charges (speciy each type o revenue generationmechanism)

- scientic research ees

- genetic patents

- pollution charges

- sale o souvenirs rom state run shops

- other

4. Percentage o PA generated revenues retained in the PA system or re-investment9

% Speciy whether PA generated revenues are retained

directly in the PA system or are sent to government and

then returned back to the PA system

7 This data should be the total for all the PA systems to indicate total revenues. If data is only available for a specific PA system specify wh ich system.8

Note this will include non monetary values and hence will differ (be greater) than revenues.9 This includes funds to be shared by PAs with local stakeholders.

FINANCIAL SCORECARD - PART I OVERALL FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE PROTECTED AREAS SYSTEM


16/28

135. Total nances available to the PA system[line item 1+2.a+2.b]+ [line item 3 x line item 4]Available or operations

Available or inrastructure investment

Costs and Financing Needs1.Total annual expenditure or PAs (all PA operating and investment costs and system level

expenses)10State any extraordinary levels o capital investment in a

given year

State degree o disbursement/executed total annual

expenditures as % o available nances (line item 5.)

I this % is low, state reasons:

- by government

- by independent/other channels

2. Estimation o PA system nancing needs Where possible breakdown by terrestrial and marine sub-

systems

a. Estimated nancing needs or basic management costs (operational andinvestments) to be covered

Summarize methodology used to make estimate (eg

costs detailed at certain sites and then extrapolated or

system)

- PA central system level operational costs (salaries, ofce maintenance etc)

- PA site management operational costs

- PA site inrastructure investment costs

- PA system capacity building costs or central and site levels (training, strategy,policy reorm etc)

These system capacity building needs are additional to

daily operations but critical or system development and

are oten covered by donors

b. Estimated nancing needs or optimal management costs (operational andinvestments) to be covered

Summarize methodology used to make estimate

- PA central system level operational costs (salaries, ofce maintenance etc)

- PA site management operational costs

- PA site inrastructure investment costs

- PA system capacity building costs or central and site levels (training, strategy,

policy reorm etc)

These system capacity building needs are additional to

attaining basic management capacities and may entail

additional scientic research, public communications,

scholarships etc)

10 In some countries actual ex penditure differs from planned expenditure due to disbursement difficulties. In this case actual expenditure should be presented and a note on disbursement rates and planned expenditures can be made in the Commentscolumn.



17/28

14c. Estimated nancial needs to expand the PA systems to be ully ecologically

representative

Insert additional costs required or land purchase or new

PAs:

- basic management costs or n ew PAs

- optimal management costs or new PAs

Annual Financing Gap (nancial needs available nances)11Where possible breakdown by terrestrial and marine

sub-systems

1. Net actual annual surplus/decit12

2. Annual nancing gap or basic management scenarios

Operations

Inrastructure investment

3. Annual nancing gap or optimal management scenarios

OperationsInrastructure investment

4. Annual nancing gap or basic management o an expanded PA system (currentnetwork costs plus annual costs o adding more PAs)

5. Projected annual nancing gap or basic expenditure scenario in year X+513,14

Financial data collection needs

Speciy main data gaps i dentied rom this analysis:

Speciy actions to be taken to ll data gaps15:

11 Financing needs as calculated in (8) minus available financing total in (6).12

This will likely be zero but some PAs may have undisbursed funds and some with autonomous budgets may have deficits.13 This data is useful to show the direction and pace of the PA system towards closing the finance gap. This line can only be completed if a long term financial analy sis of the PA system has been undertaken for the country.14 As future costs are projected, initial consideration should be given to upcoming needs of PA systems to adapt to cl imate change which m ay include incorporating new areas into the PA system to facilitate habitat changes and migration.



18/28

15FINANCIAL SCORECARD PART II ASSESSING ELEMENTS OF THE FINANCING SYSTEMComponent 1 Legal, regulatory and institutionalrameworks

Comments

Element 1 Legal, policy and regulatory support or revenue generationby PAs

None

(0)

A Few

(1)

Several

(2)

Fully

(3)

(i) Laws or policies are in place that acilitate PA revenue mechanisms Speciy the revenuegeneration mechanisms that

are not permitted under the

current legal ramework

(ii) Fiscal instruments such as taxes on tourism and water or tax breaksexist to promote PA nancing

Element 2 - Legal, policy and regulatory support or revenue retention and

sharing within the PA system

No

(0)

Under

development

(1)

Yes, but needs

improvement

(2)

Yes,

satisactory

(3)

(i) Laws or policies are in place or PA revenues to be retained by the PAsystem

Speciy % to be retained:

(ii) Laws or policies are in place or PA revenues to be retained at th e PAsite level

Speciy % to be retained:

(iii) Laws or policies are in place or revenue sharing at the PA site levelwith local stakeholders

Speciy % to be shared:

Element 3 - Legal and regulatory conditions or establishing Funds(endowment, sinking or revolving)16

No

(0)

Established

(1)

Established with

limited capital(2)

Established

withadequate

capital

(3)

(i) A Fund has been established and capitalized to nance the PA system

None

(0)

A ew

(1)

Several

(2)

Sufcient

(3)

(ii) Funds have been created to nance specic PAs

15 Actions may include (i) cost data based on site based management plans and extrapolation of site costs across a PA system and (ii) revenue and budget accounts and projections.16

This element can be omitted in countries where a PA system does not require a Trust Fund due to robust financing within government.


19/28

16No

(0)

Partially

(1)

Quite well

(2)

Fully

(3)

(iii) Fund expenditures are integrated with national PA nancial planningand accounting

Element 4 - Legal, policy and regulatory support or alternativeinstitutional arrangements or PA management to reduce cost burden togovernment

None

(0)

Under

development

(1)

Yes, but needs

improvement

(2)

Yes,

Satisactory

(3)

(i)There are laws or policies which allow and regulate concessions or PAservices

(ii) There are laws or policies which allow and regulate co-management oPAs

(iii) There are laws or policies which allow and regulate local governmentmanagement o PAs

(iv) There are laws which allow, promote and regulate private reserves

Element 5 - National PA Financing Strategies

(i) There are policies and/or regulations that exist or the ollowing whichshould be part o a National PA Finance Strategy:

No

(0)

Yes, but needs

improvement

(2)

Yes, satisactory

(3)

- Comprehensive nancial data and plans or a standardized andcoordinated cost accounting systems (both input and activity basedaccounting)

- Revenue generation and ee levels across PAs Speciy the tari levels or

the PAs

- Allocation o PA budgets to PA sites (criteria based on size, threats,business plans, perormance etc)

List the budget allocation

criteria

- Saeguards to ensure that revenue generation does not adversely aect

conservation objectives o PAs- PA management plans to include nancial data or associated business

plans

(ii) Degree o ormulation, adoption and implementation o a nationalnancing strategy17

Not begun

(0)

In progress

(1)

Completed and

adopted

(3)

Under

implementa-

tion

(5)

17 A national PA Financing Strategy will include targets, policies, tools and approaches

FINANCIAL SCORECARD PART II ASSESSING ELEMENTS OF THE FINANCING SYSTEM


20/28

17Element 6 - Economic valuation o protected area systems(ecosystem services, tourism based employment etc) None(0) Partial(1) Satisactory(2) Full(3)(i) Economic valuation studies on the contribution o protected areas to

local and national development are available

Provide summary data rom

studies

(ii) PA economic valuation inuences government decision makers (eg withinMinistry o

Environment)

(eg within

other sectoral

Ministries)

(eg within

Ministry o

Finance)

Element 7- Improved government budgeting or PA systemsNo

(0)

Partially

(2)

Yes

(3)

(i) Government policy promotes budgeting or PAs based on nancialneed as determined by PA management plans

(ii) PA budgets includes unds to nance threat reduction strategies inbuer zones (eg livelihoods o communities living around the PA)18

(iii) Administrative (eg procurement) procedures acilitate budget to be

spent, reducing risk o uture budget cuts due to low disbursementrates

(iv) Government plans to increase budget, over the long term, to reducethe PA nancing gap

Element 8 - Clearly dened institutional responsibilities or nancialmanagement o PAs

None

(0)

Partial

(1)

Improving

(2)

Full

(3)

(i) Mandates o public institutions regarding PA nances are clear andagreed

Element 9- Well-dened stafng requirements, proles and incentives atsite and system level

None

(0)

Partial

(1)

Almost there

(2)

Full

(3)

(i) Central level has sufcient economists and economic planners toimprove nancial sustainability o the system

State positions and describeroles:

(ii) There is an organizational structure (eg a dedicated unit) with sufcientauthority and coordination to properly manage the nances o the PA

system

(iii) At the regional and PA site level there is sufcient proessional capacityto promote nancial sustainability at site level

State positions and describe

roles:

(iv) PA site manager responsibilities include, nancial management,cost-eectiveness and revenue generation19

18 This could include budgets for development agencies and local governments for local livelihoods.19

These responsibilities should be found in the Terms of Reference for the posts.



21/28

18(v) Budgetary incentives motivate PA managers to promote site level

nancial sustainability (eg sites generating revenues do not

necessarily experience budget cuts)

(vi) Perormance assessment o PA site managers includes assessment osound nancial planning, revenue generation, ee collection and

cost-eective management(vii) There is capacity within the system or auditing PA nances

(viii) PA managers have the possibility to budget and plan or thelong-term (eg over 5 years)

Total Score or Component 1

Actual score:

Total possible score: 101

%:

Component 2 Business planning and tools or

cost-eective managementComments

Element 1 - PA site-level management and business planning

Does not

exist

(0)

Poor

(1)

Decent

(2)

High quality

(3)

(i) Quality o PA management plans used, (based on conservationobjectives, management needs and costs based on cost-eective

analysis)

Not begun

(0)

Early stages

Below 25% o

sites within the

system(1)

Near complete

Above 70% o sites

(2)

Completed

100%

coverage

(3)

(ii) PA management plans are used at PA sites across the PA system Speciy i management plansare current or out-dated

(iii) Business plans, based on standard ormats and linked to PAmanagement plans and conservation objectives, are developed across

the PA system20

(iv) Business plans are implemented across the PA system(degree o implementation measured by achievement o objectives)

20 A PA Business Plan is a plan that analyzes and identifies the financial gap in a PAs operations, and presents opportunities to mitigate that gap through operational cost efficiencies or revenue generation sch emes. It does not refer to business plansfor specific concession services within a PA. Each country may have its own definition and methodology for business plans or may only carry out financial analysis and hence may need to adapt the questions accordingly.



22/28

19(iv) Business plans or PAs contribute to system level planning andbudgeting(v) Costs o implementing management and business plans are monitored

and contributes to cost-eective guidance and nancial perormance

reporting

Element 2 - Operational, transparent and useul accounting and auditingsystems

None

(0)

Partial

(1)

Near complete

(2)

Fullycompleted

(3)

(i) There is a transparent and coordinated cost (operational andinvestment) accounting system unctioning or the PA system

(ii) Revenue tracking systems or each PA in place and operational

(iii) There is a system so that the accounting data contributes to systemlevel planning and budgeting

Element 3 - Systems or monitoring and reporting on nancialmanagement perormance

None

(0)

Partial

(1)

Near completed

(2)

Complete &

operational

(3)

(i) All PA revenues and expenditures are ully and accurately reported byPA authorities to stakeholders

(ii) Financial returns on tourism related investments are measured andreported, where possible (eg track increase in visitor revenues beore

and ater establishment o a visitor centre)

(iii) A monitoring and reporting system in place to show how and whyunds are allocated across PA sites and the central PA authority

(iv) A reporting and evaluation system is in place to show how eectivelyPAs use their available nances (ie disbursement rate and cost-

eectiveness) to achieve management objectives

Element 4 - Methods or allocating unds across individual PA sites No(0) Yes(2)

(i) National PA budget is allocated to sites based on agreed andappropriate criteria (eg size, threats, needs, perormance)

(ii) Funds raised by co-managed PAs do not reduce government budgetallocations where unding gaps still exist

Element 5 - Training and support networks to enable PA managers tooperate more cost-eectively21

Absent

(0)

Partially done

(1)

Almost done

(2)

Fully

(3)


21 Cost-effectiveness is broadly defined as maximizing impact from amount invested and achieving a target impact in the least cost manner. It is not about lowering c osts and resulting impacts.


23/28

20(i) Guidance on cost-eective management developed and being used

by PA managers

(ii) Inter-PA site level network exist or PA managers to share inormationwith eachother on their costs, practices and impacts

(iii) Operational and investment cost comparisons between PA sites

complete, available and being used to track PA manager perormance

(iv) Monitoring and learning systems o cost-eectiveness are in place andeed into system management policy and planning

(v) PA site managers are trained in nancial management and cost-eective management

(vi) PA nancing system acilitates PAs to share costs o common practiceswith each other and with PA headquarters22


Actual score:


%:

Component 3 Tools or revenue generation by PAs Comments

Element 1 - Number and variety o revenue sources used across the PAsystem

None

(0)

Partially

(1)

A air amount

(2)

Optimal

(3)

(i) An up-to-date analysis o revenue options or the country completeand available including easibility studies;

(ii) There is a diverse set o sources and mechanisms, generating unds orthe PA system

Suggested benchmarks or

a diversied portolio o

nancial mechanisms or the

PA system:

Partial 1-2

Fair amount 3-4

Optimal 5 or more

List the mechanisms:

22 This might include aerial surveys, marine pollution monitoring, economic valuations etc.



24/28

21(iii) PAs are operating revenue mechanisms that generate positive netrevenues (greater than annual operating costs and over long-termpayback initial investment cost)

(iv) PAs enable local communities to generate revenues, resulting inreduced threats to the PAs

Element 2 - Setting and establishment o user ees across the PA system No(0)

Partially

(1)

Satisactory

(2)

Fully

(3)

(i) A system wide strategy and action plan or user ees is complete andadopted by government

I PA sites have taris but

there is no system strategy

score as partial

(ii) The national tourism industry and Ministry are supportive and arepartners in the PA user ee system and programmes

(iii) Tourism related inrastructure investment is proposed and developedor PA sites across the network based on analysis o revenue potential

and return on investment 23

(iv) Where tourism is promoted PA managers can demonstrate maximumrevenue whilst not threatening PA conservation objectives

(v) Non tourism user ees are applied and generate additional revenue

Element 3 - Eective ee collection systemsNon

(0)

Partially

(1)

Completed

(2)

Operational

(3)

System wide guidelines or ee collection are complete and approved by

PA authorities

Fee collection systems are being implemented at PA sites in a

cost-eective manner

Fee collection systems are monitored, evaluated and acted upon

PA visitors are satised with the proessionalism o ee collection and the

services provided

This can be done through

visitor surveys

Element 4 - Communication strategies to increase public awareness aboutthe rationale or revenue generation mechanisms

None

(0)

Partially

(1)

Satisactory

(2)

Fully

(3)

(i) Communication campaigns or the public about tourism ees,conservation taxes etc are widespread and high prole at national

level

(ii) Communication campaigns or the public about PA ees are in place atPA site level

23 As tourism infrastructure increases w ithin PAs and in turn increases visitor numbers and PA revenues the s core for this item should be increased in proportion to its importance to funding the PA system.



25/28

22 Element 5 - Operational PES schemes or PAs24

None

(0)

Partially

(1)

Progressing

(2)

Fully

(3)

(i) A system wide strategy and action plan or PES is complete andadopted by government

(ii) Pilot PES schemes at select PA sites developed

(iii) Operational perormance o pilots is monitored, evaluated andreported

(iv) Scale up o PES across the PA system is underway

Element 6- Concessions operating within PAs25None

(0)

Partially

(1)

Progressing

(2)

Fully

(3)

(i) A system wide strategy and implementation action plan is completeand adopted by government or concessions

(ii) Concession opportunities are operational at pilot PA sites

(iii) Operational perormance (environmental and nancial) o pilots ismonitored, evaluated, reported and acted upon

(iv) Scale up o concessions across the PA system is underway

Element 7 - PA training programmes on revenue generation mechanisms None(0)

Limited

(1)

Satisactory

(2)

Extensive

(3)

(i) Training courses run by the government and other competentorganizations or PA managers on revenue mechanisms and nancial

administration


Actual score:


%:


24 Where PES is not appropriate or feasible for a PA system take 12 points off total possible s core for the PA system.25

Concessions will be mainly for tourism related services suc h as visitor centres, giftshops, restaurants, transportation etc.


26/28

23FINANCIAL SCORECARD PART III SCORING AND MEASURING PROGRESS

Total Score or PA System

Total Possible Score

233

Actual score as a percentage o the total possible score

Percentage scored in previous year26

26 Insert NA if this is first year of completing scorecard.


27/28

24 Annex I Revenue Projection EstimatesThis table should be lled out to supplement data presented on revenue generation in both Part I and II.

Fees and other revenue generationmechanisms

Current eelevels

Current revenues Proposed eelevel

Estimatedrevenue

Comments

Total

Annex II Policy Reorm and Strengthening

This Table should be lled out to complement inormation provided in Part II, Component I on the policy and legislative rameworks. This table presents

the list all policies to be reormed, established or strengthened to improve the PA nancing system

Policy/Law Justication or change or newpolicy/law

Recommended changes Proposed Timerame


28/28

25

Financial Sustainability Scorecard for Protected Areas

Documents

Transcript of Financial Sustainability Scorecard for Protected Areas